Climate Change: 10 Billion Tons Of Carbon Are Now Being Released Every Year, The Fastest In 66 Million Years

Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries

The headlines are amazing.  It’s true we are releasing a lot of Co2.  They are right to be worried based on their models.   Their models (Catastrophic Climate Change believers) show that the amount of CO2 should generate 8 degrees C or 12 degrees C and the oceans should rise 60 feet and temperatures should be soaring at incredible rates.  1 degree C per decade would be reasonable given their models and past statements.

5myr temp change

However, a strange disconnect between the stories and reality has been happening that seems to have eluded the theorists.  The actual rate of change of temperature is 0.05C / decade for the last 8 decades, 0.1C for the last 4 decades and 0.0C for the last 2 decades.   In other words if anything as our rate of putting CO2 into the atmosphere has gone up the climate “change” is slowing down or even going to zero and the rate of change is 1/40th what some of them thought.


For the last year we have been in an El Nino.   This seems to bolster the case as temperatures have risen again which gives these enthusiasts great glee to see the thermometers finally responding again after almost 20 years of flatline.  The problem is this is El Nino.  It is NOT CO2.  El Ninos happen all the time.  This one is bigger, some will be smaller and there will be La Ninas when the temp goes down.  The fact is that over the last 2 decades while we’ve plowed MORE THAN 50% of all the CO2 man has put in the atmosphere  the temperature has gone virtually nowhere.

Isn’t the El Nino caused by CO2?

In this chart below from Berkeley Earth project you can see we had a negative PDO/AMO period similar to the one we started in 2000 and exists today from 1940-1970.  During the middle of this PDO/AMO downward phase there is a surge around 1955.  Similarly in the 1880-1910 downward phases of PDO/AMO there was a large El Nino that happened about halfway into the phase at 1892.  In other words an El Nino spike halfway through a downward phase of PDO/AMO is typical and therefore not evidence of CO2 having some effect.    If this trend continues the most likely thing is a drop in temperatures for 15 more years before temperatures again start rising.

Some of the strong believers of CAGW believe that the El Nino this year signals an end to the downward phase of PDO/AMO.   If so it will be evidence that CO2 has changed the natural variability.  However, the El Nino by itself does not provide any evidence we have any different behavior in the climate because this same thing happened almost exactly 60 years ago and 120 years ago exactly at the same point in the same phase of PDO/AMO.  If anything this duplicate behavior would suggest the PDO/AMO is dominating climate and that we are seeing exactly what we saw in the last 2 cycles of PDO/AMO and probably more.



There is an underlying trend to higher temperatures that is unmistakable.  CAGW would like to blame it all on CO2 but this is not clear.  This trend upward started long before the CO2 increases happened and seems to be something related to a recovery from the little ice age that happened in the 1600 period.  CAGW believers state that after 1940 the upward temperature is NOT related to recovery from the LIA.  Some even try to argue that all the gain since 1750 is related to man but you can’t have it both ways.  If man is the cause of all heating since 1750 then what caused the LIA?   It is clear that something else is at work over long periods in the climate besides our CO2 obsession.  Looking at the longer historical record over thousands of years shows a definite wave formation that works over hundreds/thousands of years and it is not clear if some or all of the current underlying trend in rising temperatures since 1750 is the result of this unknown factor.


We simply are not seeing the high sensitivity to CO2 that the theory predicts.

In any case the amount of temperature change over the last 70 years is not 12C or 8C or 4C hotter as Hansen and his fellow believers have asserted should be happening.  Over the last 2 decades it’s 0C hotter or even if you want to believe Hansen’s adjusted data it’s still 0.1C/decade hotter which is 1/40th the change they imagine.

So, does the temperature take a long time to manifest?  Could the temperature suddenly climb like their models indicated which have failed to show the decline in rates?  Will actual temperatures rise to meet the line of the computer models?  No.  There is no physical process understood that could allow that.  This would be called a “miracle” by religious people if it happened and the stories you read above are about as likely as Jesus feeds 5,000 with loaf of bread.  Maybe that did happen if you believe in god but I am not sure why god is going to cause temps to rise by 1C or 2C because without an act of god NOBODY could argue where such a sudden increase would come from.

The fact is that in spite of the climate alarmists proclaiming it is “all settled” it isn’t anywhere near settled.  The mere fact that temperatures are rising 1/40th the rate some of them predicted is clear evidence something is seriously wrong with this theory that CO2 is the ultimate controller of temperature.  Clearly it is NOT.

If temperatures had climbed anywhere near the rate they predicted we would all be believers.

The fact is that over the last 3 decades while the alarmist proclamations get ever shriller and more crazy like the headlines above clearly meant to instill fear and to take advantage of an El Nino year and grab the weather reports as evidence of Climate Change something they warned the opponents of their theory would do instead we see clearly it is THEM that clings to the latest weather reports screaming danger danger will robinson ignoring the fact that over 20 years or 70 years there has been 1/40th the change they expected.


They are not the sober rational scientists but screaming crazy ideas that have no basis in reasonable facts.

Is carbon being poured into the atmosphere at the highest rate in 66 million years?

That is scientifically stupid statement.  There is no possible way the numbers are accurate enough to know this.   However, assuming it is true one has to then come to the logical problem that if that is the case why do the 1930s and 1940s show higher temperatures than today.   Why is the rate of change so low?

They want to look at just the last year but as a scientist the problem with this is that the last year is an El Nino year not a CO2 year.  

Yes, maybe some of the El Nino is caused by CO2 but maybe not.  If you look historically you will see the temperature of the Earth varies over a period of 60 years by about 0.5 degrees up and down.


This cycle is very noticeable and during the period 1940-1970 temperatures flattened or went down.  From 2000 – 2030 temperatures appear to be flat and may even go down by the end of the period.  These are both periods with extremely higher amounts of CO2 being produced.  Yet we had a downturn.  From 1910 – 1940 temperatures went up nearly 0.5C yet we were producing almost no CO2.   The correspondence between CO2 and temperature is clearly not that great as they say.

They say the effect of CO2 is HUGE.  12 DEGREES C!  More than an ice age of temperature difference projected.  Below you see a chart of almost 10C temperature change from a difference of only 100 parts per million of CO2.   If CO2 caused the ice ages why don’t we see more effect from 110 psrts per million added in the last 70 years?


Yet the actual temperature hasn’t moved 0.1C in the last 20 years.  NOT 1C not 10C.

One has to wonder how it is that “scientists” get away with making these projections and these headlines get made when there is no evidence to back up their models or claims?  We have 35 years of data since they started making these predictions of doom.  In that period temperatures have gone up 0.3-0.4C.  Their models which they said were conservative predicted more than 1.2C and some suggested 2C or 3C.  Some of them said that 10C from a doubling of CO2 was possible.


To bolster their claim they reach back to 1750 and say 1.2C since 1750.


BUT, we have only been putting CO2 into the atmosphere for the last 70 years in any quantity.  Also, since 1750 the Earth has been heating up because of a recovery from the little ice age unrelated to CO2.



So, they can’t claim this 0.8C from 1750.  The only meaningful numbers to look at are the last 70 years since we started producing CO2 in quantity.  In those 70 years the temperature change is closer to 0.4C far less than one degree EVEN THOUGH we have poured 110 parts per million of CO2 into the atmosphere effectively increasing the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere by 50% roughly.  This should have caused somewhere between 2 and 4 C change depending on the model NOT 0.4C.

unadjusted recent temps

We should be in a catastrophic situation.  We should be seeing temperatures rise so fast there would be NO DOUBT.  Yet they are spending most of their time trying to adjust temperatures by small amounts here and there, tiny amounts here and there add up to a tenth of a degree here or there and they claim:

There is a temperature rise in the last 20 years.  It’s not 0.0C it is 0.02C rise.  We are right.  See there is catastrophic global warming.

This is crazy.  If the atmosphere were responding as they suggested we shouldn’t be looking for 0.02C and arguing about it.  We should have whole degrees of change already, not by stealing it from the 1800s and the little ice age recovery or be ferreting out of infinitesimal adjustments to land thermometers.

Sea Levels Rising !!!! 10 feet by 2100!  10% of US population underwater

Sea levels rise at fastest rate in 3000 years!  Wow.  Is it rising at a foot a decade?  No.  The unprecedented rate is less than a foot per CENTURY.  Not only that it is about the same rate actually as was seen in the 1800s before we put much CO2 into the atmosphere.

Tipping Points

They said there would be tipping points.  The loss of arctic ice would accelerate and the loss of this ice would release gigatons of methane locked in the arctic.  Didn’t happen.  They have said so many things that turned out false.  I document them here.   If you haven’t been following all the failed predictions you might not realize how little credibility these latest claims have.  This is a case of the boy calling Wolf 50 times, 100 times and the people who want to believe keep believing even though there is no wolf.   At some point you have to see that the kid is a mental case.   We have been watching every prediction and every single one is a failure.  Nothing they said has come true.

They are right we are putting a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere.

However, the effect seems to be much much smaller than they said.   You can call that yelling wolf or you can believe them this time.   The problem is that this is science not a fairy tale.  We have data and the data don’t back up the claims.  In science that means the theory is kaput.  In religion it’s a matter of faith.  For climate believers they are living in an eternal church choir calling for the lords return.  It is not science.  It is religion at this point.  These scare stories are no more valid than the prophets who say Jesus is coming next year.  The end of the world in 2012.  This is not science.  Believe it if you will but there is no scientific validity to claim temperatures will move because of CO2 in any significant way if they haven’t so far.  There is no multiple degrees of heat stored in the planet somewhere.  It can’t happen.   It all comes down to this chart.   The observations DO NOT match the predictions.  Not even close.



The Hansen theory of climate change which seemed prescient in 1980 and through 1990 seemed to be logical.  I believed it was possible if not proven.  However, since then it has become apparent that the rate of change of all the factors expected from a high sensitivity to CO2 has not manifested.  This is simply irrefutable.  The data says something is wrong with the theory yet articles like the subject of this blog suggest that we are in for massive change.  This might have been believable in 1990 when the theory was in its heydey but today it is obvious that these projections of future impact of CO2 are irresponsible.

There is no evidence the climate is moving in any radical way despite the crazy hype being promoted by Hansen and his believers.  If you look at historical records (at least the ones they haven’t tampered with) you will see that we have had disasters in the past worse than today easily.  We have had temperature rises and drops equal to today and we have had El Ninos and that sea level has been rising for centuries and the rate of change is almost imperceptibly small and continues to be.   There is no evidence to support this hype.

The hype is based on predictions of models that say that if CO2 were to rise thus and thus we should see massive change but this massive change hasn’t happened even though we have put in enormous amounts of CO2.  Therefore the theories and models are wrong, completely wrong and therefore all these hype stories based on high CO2 is as accurate as saying the increase in cows is responsible for climate change or that increasing human lifespan is responsible for climate change.  The CO2 probably does have some component of the long term upward trend but it doesn’t have ALL of the responsibility and the upward long term trend is modest.  A part of a modest trend says CO2 isn’t that big a deal but the articles above try to associate high CO2 with high change and that is simply hype that cannot be backed by data or science.